House Committee Says Yes to Employee Free Choice Act, Bush Threatens Veto

The House Education and Labor Committee beat back attempts to weaken or kill the Employee Free Choice Act, then voted late February 14 to send the bill to the full House for a vote in the coming months.

The committee vote was 26-19 in favor of advancing the legislation (H.R. 800), which was introduced Feb. 5 and has the bipartisan support of 233 co-sponsors.

The Employee Free Choice Act would give workers greater freedom to make their own decisions about joining a union to bargain for a better life by:

• Establishing stronger penalties for violations of employee rights when workers seek to form a union and during first-contract negotiations,

• Providing mediation and arbitration for first-contract disputes, and

• Allowing employees to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said the House committee, “…is taking an important step toward restoring workers’ freedom. I look forward to working with other elected representatives from both parties to continue rebuilding the American dream—an America that works for working Americans.”

The most significant of several amendments offered by Republican opponents of the bill would keep workers from forming a union by majority sign-up even when their employer agrees. It would force workers to continue to try to win a voice at work through the flawed National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) election procedures.

Majority sign-up has been an option for workers and employers for 70 years under the nation’s labor laws, with no evidence of problems for workers or employers. Major employers such as Cingular and Kaiser Health Systems allow workers to form unions through majority sign-up, with less workplace conflict and disruption than the contentious NLRB process.

As several workers describe on the AFL-CIO’s Employee Free Choice Act website, the current election process allows employers to coerce, intimidate and harass employees. When workers try to form unions, 25 percent of employers fire at least one employee for union activity, 75 percent hire consultants to make it harder for workers to form their union and more than 90 percent require workers to attend mandatory anti-union meetings.

During debate on the amendment (originally introduced as a separate bill by the late Rep. Charles Norwood (R-Ga.), who died Feb. 13), Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) claimed “there is no coercion” in the NLRB election process.

However, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), a member of the Electrical Workers, set the record straight: “Employers can and do threaten to fire workers….Employers can and do threaten to close the business and move jobs overseas….[The amendment] undermines the right every human being should have to determine for themselves if they want to be represented by a union.”

Rep. George Miller, the committee chairman and chief sponsor of the bill, debunked the myth touted by Republican and corporate opponents that the Employee Free Choice Act would prohibit NLRB elections. Miller said, “The Employee Free Choice Act is very simple. It says that if a majority of workers in a workplace sign authorization cards in support of a union, then they get a union. That’s it. Workers are still free to choose a National Labor Relations Board election if they wish.”

Corporate front groups are mounting a massive campaign against the Employer Free Choice Act.

On February 14 Vice President Dick Cheney used his appearance before the National Association of Manufacturers to express the Bush Administration’s opposition to the EFCA.

“Our Administration rejects any attempt to short-circuit the rights of workers,” Cheney asserted. “We will defend their right to vote yes or no by secret ballot and their right to fair bargaining. H.R. 800 violates these principles, and if it is sent to the President, he will veto the bill.”

Like Cheney and NAM claiming to support workers’ rights, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, as part of the misleadingly named Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, claims to want to “safeguard” workers and their rights.

The Chamber sent an e-mail to its “activists” telling them to gear up for a “virtual” March on Washington to urge Congress to defeat the Employee Free Choice Act.

If passed, the EFCA would strengthen the protections afforded to pro-union workers. It would stiffen penalties against employers that illegally fire workers for union activity. The Center for Economic Policy Research released a study that showed employers fire one in five union advocates and a Cornell University study showed that, in 2004, 92 percent of employers forced employees to take part in mandatory anti-union captive audience presentations. The bill also allows workers to form a union based simply on majority sign up—skirting the long drawn out process that comes from the employer implemented National Labor Relations Board elections.

In a press conference in San Francisco Feb 21, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi vowed that passage of the EFCA will be a top priority when Congress returns from the Presidents Day recess. Pelosi said House Democrats, as part of their first 100 hours agenda, passed an increase in the minimum wage and now it’s time to restore the right of American workers to join a union without harassment from employers.

The San Francisco event was part of a weeklong series of actions around the nation as workers met with members of Congress and community leaders to push for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act.